ArticleHealth expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy2026
Access to Supportive Care Among Australian Cancer Carers: Experiences of Priority Populations.
Article in Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Access to Supportive Care Among Australian Cancer Carers: Experiences of Priority Populations.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInformal carers are essential in supporting people with cancer yet often experience unmet supportive care needs.
aimsThe aim of this study was to examine (a) access to supportive care services (b) perceived barriers to accessing services, and (c) the potential influence of carer health literacy on access and barriers to supportive care among carers across three priority population groups (rural-remote-dwelling, LGBTIQA+ and culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD)).
methodsCross-sectional online survey of Australian adult cancer carers. Supportive care use, access barriers, and health literacy (Health Literacy of Caregivers Scale - Cancer (HLSC-C)) were assessed. Logistic regression examined differences across priority groups, and mediation analyses explored the role of health literacy.
resultsAmong 1154 carers, 61.9% accessed some supportive care (46.7% formal services), yet 86.6% reported at least one barrier, with 71.0% reporting two or more. Common barriers were time constraints, service availability, and long wait times. Compared to non-priority population carers, rural/remote carers had higher odds of reporting limited local availability and services not available when needed (aOR = 5.08 for both). CALD carers had higher odds of reporting a barrier (aOR = 1.81), including long wait times, cost, and lack of culturally appropriate services (aOR = 33.03). Health literacy significantly mediated the association between CALD status and reported barriers.
conclusionsCancer carers have limited access to supportive care and face systemic barriers. Inequities remain, particularly for carers from rural/remote areas and those from CALD backgrounds. To improve equity, there is a need for co-designed, accessible interventions that address health literacy and the diverse geographic, cultural, and linguistic needs of carers. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: People with lived experience of cancer caregiving were included on this study's advisory committee. In this role, their expertise informed the study design, including the development of the questionnaire, the Participant Information and Consent Form (PICF), and recruitment processes. They were also invited to contribute to data interpretation and the preparation of this manuscript. The lead consumer representative (NR) is listed as a co-author on this manuscript.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.